From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40141FF6D for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 18:48:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965748AbcLVSsi (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2016 13:48:38 -0500 Received: from bsmtp1.bon.at ([213.33.87.15]:34147 "EHLO bsmtp1.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755587AbcLVSsh (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2016 13:48:37 -0500 Received: from dx.site (unknown [93.83.142.38]) by bsmtp1.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3tl0sb1GK7z5tlP; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 19:48:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dx.site (Postfix) with ESMTP id 185151B85; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 19:48:34 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Really fix the isatty() problem on Windows To: Johannes Schindelin References: Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Pranit Bauva From: Johannes Sixt Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 19:48:33 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Am 21.12.2016 um 22:15 schrieb Johannes Sixt: > Am 21.12.2016 um 18:53 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: >> The current patch series is based on `pu`, as that already has the >> winansi_get_osfhandle() fix. For ease of testing, I also have a branch >> based on master which you can pull via >> >> git pull https://github.com/dscho/git mingw-isatty-fixup-master > > Will test and report back tomorrow. This version 1 of the series passes the test suite (next + a handful other topics) for me. It has also undergone a bit of field testing, and things look fine. I haven't looked at the resulting code, yet, but I don't expect to find anything fishy. -- Hannes